5 ms·

Ugly infrastructure: Why can't we have nice things?

47 points by bilsbie 1y ago

affinepplan 1y ago
> Why can't we have nice things? cars.
- marcosdumay 1y ago
  All of the good examples on the article are car-centric. The only one about a train is a bad example.
jaoane 1y ago
[flagged]
- cess11 1y ago
  Why would they prefer that over anxious and confused?
  - jaoane 1y ago
    Why not both? What’s obvious is they don’t want us happy. Happy people don’t need medical treatment. Happy people make more intelligent shopping decisions. Happy people don’t overeat or drink as much alcohol. And so on.
    - immibis 1y ago
      The purpose of a system is what it does.
    - cess11 1y ago
      That's not within the claim you made. If you meant anxious and confused and sad and depressed you should have written that instead. Either way, you ascribe a conscious malice to people in power that they frankly don't seem clever enough to hold.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
potato3732842 1y ago
Can you imagine how quickly moisture and winter would destroy the facade on that desert overpass in Minneapolis or how quickly vegetation would climb it in Savannah? When it comes to concrete those "ugly" flat surfaces do a great deal to make concrete weather more gracefully anywhere that gets a winter worth speaking of and prevent vegetation from finding a home in more tropical clients. The painted overpass would not wear as poorly but it still needs to be maintained. A simple pressure washing contract (that we all pay for) turns into something more costly. Multiply by everything you could get in the habit of prettying up with paint and it's a big bill. When it comes to indoor capital investments those flat surfaces are easy to clean and they're places that label and storage of ancillary items can be affixed and they reduce wasted space when things are placed adjacent with other things. When it comes to buildings themselves those flat lines lend themselves to ease of laying out the indoor and space. The idea that you have to make things pretty for decision makers reflects how divorced those decision makers are from the daily realities of thing the things they decide (same goes for the peanut gallery). I'm so sick of listening to people saying they ought to be prettier when doing so has serious tradeoffs. Are they willing to pay for it? Even a couple percent effort adds up when you make it part of your typical decision making. I would rather have 11 ugly widgets than ten pretty widgets.
- mcntsh 1y ago
  sort of a reductionist argument, in my opinion. obviously it's going to cost more to build and maintain nice things but we should want to do that because it makes our lives richer.
- happymellon 1y ago
  Gosh, I wish there had been other ideas for beautification other than a single desert overpass that obviously wouldn't work in colder, wetter climates. Although I see grooves or other embellishment on struts in the UK, however they could be so much better.
- pixl97 1y ago
  I think you're on the right lines, that people just have no clue how much infrastructure there is in the modern world and even building it as cheaply and as easily to maintain is a burden in the trillions of dollars.
airstrike 1y ago
On this note, I must recommend Roger Scruton's "Why Beauty Matters" once more: https://vimeo.com/549715999 https://vimeo.com/549715999
black_13 1y ago
[dead]
thedanbob 1y ago
> Sometimes I play a game while driving, seeing how long I can go without seeing a sign or warning. If you had to hold your breath between each one you'd be in no danger; you could drive hours with no risk of passing out. This struck me the last time I traveled in the UK: they seem to have about 3-4 times as many road signs as the US, to the point where it almost becomes a dangerous distraction. On the other hand, they don’t have the omnipresent billboards and other public advertising that the US has.
- louthy 1y ago
  > UK As a UK resident this drives me mad. Signs like “Tractors Turning” [1]. Like I’m going to see the sign and not notice the f**king tractor? And also, there’s never a tractor there! Another classic is “Road liable to flooding” [2]. Reeeeally? Ok, am I drowning? No. Phew… looks like it’s not flooding right now, I’ll make a mental note if I ever come this way again and it’s raining, or I’m struggling to breathe and I can’t work out why. Signs for occasional happenings that anyone with eyes can see. Then there’s the speed-camera signs, but no speed cameras. Or, the classic “mobile speed camera” sign [3]. Fixed. In place. Forever. Or, the “New Road Layout” sign [4], where the layout will never grow old! Our street furniture has gone so extreme, there’s no way one could read all of it and concentrate properly on driving and the vast majority of it is utterly useless. /rant [1] https://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/04/64/50/4645087_4636b9c6.jpg https://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/04/64/50/4645087_4636b9... [2] https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/resources/images/19016634.jpg?type=og-image https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/resources/images/190... [3] https://s0.rbk.ru/v6_top_pics/media/img/9/55/754788605175559.jpeg https://s0.rbk.ru/v6_top_pics/media/img/9/55/754788605175559... [4] https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/New_Road_Layout_Ahead_Sign_-_Allendale_Road%2C_Loughborough.jpg?ssl=1 https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0...
  - truculent 1y ago
    A favourite of mine is the London Underground having warnings about using the escalators, stating that last year there were 100 incidents from people not being sufficiently careful. Given the number of people using the service, this is incredibly small and I hardly think a sign is going to help the few people at risk!
Rodmine 1y ago
It's like your opinion, man. Aesthetic taste varies from culture-to-culture, even individual to individual. Sometimes, minimal and simple is beautiful. I really thought that the pictures you were posting later were examples of ugly design (when I was glossing over it) and I found out that you were saying that that one looks good to you. The one on top, the example of your ugly design, has natural beauty: a weathered concrete finish. I prefer that WAYYY more than any of the later examples.
- croisillon 1y ago
  the first one, the Mary McAleese bridge, is in the article as an example of a nice design
  - hoseyor 1y ago
    I find that curious, because I would not even really call that a design. The distinguishing characteristics are more what it lacks than what it has. But for me it is in fact a symbolic character of the roughly 20th century that we still suffer from because it sucked all humanity and joy out of everything; including design, art, and beauty itself. That bridge represents the asphalt parking lot of bridges in my mind. Featureless, drab, barren, desolate, soulless, miserable, humanity crushing … the 20th century and its current ripple effects of shell shocked humans lacking any kind of identity, self-respect, or will for survival. It’s the “bare minimum nutrition to prevent by organs from failing” of bridges/design. At least do the equivalent of showing yourself and brushing your teeth by painting the bridge in some way so you are not constantly reminded that your culture, identity, and self-respect is dead and you have no will for survival.
    - airstrike 1y ago
      > I would not even really call that a design. The distinguishing characteristics are more what it lacks than what it has. “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” ― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
- 1y ago
troupo 1y ago
It's not just infrastructure. Most modern buildings are utilitarian and race-to-the-bottom cheap to a fault. And while a lot of this can be explained by the requirement to build a lot of things fast, and cheap, even one-off buildings that are supposed to be unique are... just slabs of concrete and/or glass. I think nowhere is it more evident than in Europe: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1912957880195575980 https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1912957880195575980
- ozim 1y ago
  Ugh let infrastructure be infrastructure inconspicuous. I don’t want to be attacked by flashy colored buildings all the time. Once in a while it is cool to have some art or colorful painting. I have my life to live, children, animals - I want to furnish my home to my taste. I don’t want to live in self proclaimed “taste critiques” environment. Every single of those posts “we live in boring landscape, cars are average and not standing out” - feels like those friends that come over for a party and want to show you all the funny YT videos they are amused by - I don’t care I have my own YT vids I am amused by and such people are just annoying not “cool”.
  - troupo 1y ago
    > I don’t want to be attacked by flashy colored buildings all the time. There are other types of decorations than colors, and there are other colors than flashy. The very first example in the OG article isn't colorful, and is rather beautiful. The link to tweet shows a gray beautiful building. > I don’t want to live in self proclaimed “taste critiques” environment. If you are surrounded by ugly things, there's very little space where you can learn and develop taste. Already you can't imagine any other alternatives than "being surrounded by flashy colored buildings all the time" Edit: you are not alone. I've seen this "counterpoint" in quite a few conversations. Many people cannot imagine anything beyond "buildings in flashy colors" because that's usually the only alternative the modern world provides. Something like this: https://www.dreamstime.com/new-technologies-construction-multi-storey-buildings-modern-bright-colors-high-rise-russia-image232782910 https://www.dreamstime.com/new-technologies-construction-mul...
  - lurking_swe 1y ago
hk1337 1y ago
I thought this was going to be software development focused, so I read it a bit from that perspective. > There are any number of ways to build an ugly bridge, but its builders were allowed to make it pretty, and they were right to do that. There's obviously extremes to this with developers being perfectionists holding up release (I could probably be on the poster for this) but the pendulum can swing the other way too. Sometimes not taking that extra hour or day to do something can cost you many hours and days later on in the future and to my point, sometimes taking that extra hour or day can save you hours or days in the future.
appleorchard46 1y ago
The more time goes on the more I appreciate Lady Bird Johnson's (first lady to Lyndon B Johnson) beautification of America project [0]. It's impressive how precise a response to modern urban hellscape woes it is: more greenery, native gardening, more pedestrian-friendly spaces, public transit, litter reduction, less billboards and advertising. The perspective that aesthetic beauty and things that just make a place nice to live tend to go hand-in-hand is an underrated one. > “Though the word beautification makes the concept sound merely cosmetic, it involves much more: clean water, clean air, clean roadsides, safe waste disposal and preservation of valued old landmarks as well as great parks and wilderness areas. To me…beautification means our total concern for the physical and human quality we pass on to our children and the future.” [0] https://www.nps.gov/articles/lady-bird-johnson-beautification-cultural-landscapes.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/lady-bird-johnson-beautificatio...
taeric 1y ago
Suspension bridges tend to be much prettier than other styles. I think this every time I get to cross the Tacoma Narrows. I'm assuming that is just a preference of mine based on how much rarer they are to see? Could be that they tend to be more expensive and have the maintenance baked into the costs? Good examples in the article of how to make others pretty. I'm assuming cost is almost always the limiting factor. Many "ugly" bridges have a hard time keeping up with required maintenance. Keeping any art clean and maintained is almost certainly not in the budget.
- AlotOfReading 1y ago
  Here's another hypothesis: making it look utilitarian is a way to preempt accusations of cost bloat. The first question anyone's going to ask about a nice looking design is "how much did we spend on that?". Ugly, utilitarian design says "I do exactly what you need and nothing else", which we interpret as cost efficient.
  - taeric 1y ago
    Right, I think that plays into my assertion? Budgets are so tight that places tend to go out of their way not just to adhere to them, but to make sure it is clear that they are adhering.
  - i80and 1y ago
    This is exactly it: I know people who, whenever they see something funded through taxes that is anything beyond the absolute bare minimum, start grousing about money regardless of any actual underlying costs. People wildly overestimate the costs of making things nice; penny-wise pound-foolish stuff.
  - marcosdumay 1y ago
    In my experience, the number of people that will say "it was expensive, but it's really beautiful" on the reverse situation is overwhelmingly larger than the people that will say "how much did we spend on that?". In fact (and it annoys me to no end), people tend to think of expensive infrastructure as a positive trait, not a negative one.
notnmeyer 1y ago
surely this boils down to cost. if you prioritize low cost you will probably sacrifice aesthetics. maybe it doesn’t have to be that way, but it seems like it often is for better or worse. would i rather pay more in taxes for a nicer looking freeway or have it be utilitarian? ehhhhhhh, im unsure.
- dsego 1y ago
  Maybe, but also lack of taste. The classic comparison being PCs and Macs, most PC manufacturers lack taste to design beautiful machines, a lot of them gave up at this point and just copy whatever Apple is doing.
cadamsdotcom 1y ago
> We won't bean-count our way to a better future. I beg to differ. Cheaper stuff is accessible to more people. The problem is we haven’t figured out how to agree on how much ornamentation is the right amount.

47 points by bilsbie 1y ago

affinepplan 1y ago

> Why can't we have nice things? cars.

marcosdumay 1y ago
All of the good examples on the article are car-centric. The only one about a train is a bad example.

jaoane 1y ago

[flagged]

cess11 1y ago
Why would they prefer that over anxious and confused?
- jaoane 1y ago
  Why not both? What’s obvious is they don’t want us happy. Happy people don’t need medical treatment. Happy people make more intelligent shopping decisions. Happy people don’t overeat or drink as much alcohol. And so on.
  - immibis 1y ago
    The purpose of a system is what it does.
  - cess11 1y ago
    That's not within the claim you made. If you meant anxious and confused and sad and depressed you should have written that instead. Either way, you ascribe a conscious malice to people in power that they frankly don't seem clever enough to hold.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

potato3732842 1y ago

Can you imagine how quickly moisture and winter would destroy the facade on that desert overpass in Minneapolis or how quickly vegetation would climb it in Savannah? When it comes to concrete those "ugly" flat surfaces do a great deal to make concrete weather more gracefully anywhere that gets a winter worth speaking of and prevent vegetation from finding a home in more tropical clients. The painted overpass would not wear as poorly but it still needs to be maintained. A simple pressure washing contract (that we all pay for) turns into something more costly. Multiply by everything you could get in the habit of prettying up with paint and it's a big bill. When it comes to indoor capital investments those flat surfaces are easy to clean and they're places that label and storage of ancillary items can be affixed and they reduce wasted space when things are placed adjacent with other things. When it comes to buildings themselves those flat lines lend themselves to ease of laying out the indoor and space. The idea that you have to make things pretty for decision makers reflects how divorced those decision makers are from the daily realities of thing the things they decide (same goes for the peanut gallery). I'm so sick of listening to people saying they ought to be prettier when doing so has serious tradeoffs. Are they willing to pay for it? Even a couple percent effort adds up when you make it part of your typical decision making. I would rather have 11 ugly widgets than ten pretty widgets.

mcntsh 1y ago
sort of a reductionist argument, in my opinion. obviously it's going to cost more to build and maintain nice things but we should want to do that because it makes our lives richer.
happymellon 1y ago
Gosh, I wish there had been other ideas for beautification other than a single desert overpass that obviously wouldn't work in colder, wetter climates. Although I see grooves or other embellishment on struts in the UK, however they could be so much better.
pixl97 1y ago
I think you're on the right lines, that people just have no clue how much infrastructure there is in the modern world and even building it as cheaply and as easily to maintain is a burden in the trillions of dollars.

airstrike 1y ago

On this note, I must recommend Roger Scruton's "Why Beauty Matters" once more: https://vimeo.com/549715999 https://vimeo.com/549715999

black_13 1y ago

[dead]

thedanbob 1y ago

> Sometimes I play a game while driving, seeing how long I can go without seeing a sign or warning. If you had to hold your breath between each one you'd be in no danger; you could drive hours with no risk of passing out. This struck me the last time I traveled in the UK: they seem to have about 3-4 times as many road signs as the US, to the point where it almost becomes a dangerous distraction. On the other hand, they don’t have the omnipresent billboards and other public advertising that the US has.

louthy 1y ago
> UK As a UK resident this drives me mad. Signs like “Tractors Turning” [1]. Like I’m going to see the sign and not notice the f**king tractor? And also, there’s never a tractor there! Another classic is “Road liable to flooding” [2]. Reeeeally? Ok, am I drowning? No. Phew… looks like it’s not flooding right now, I’ll make a mental note if I ever come this way again and it’s raining, or I’m struggling to breathe and I can’t work out why. Signs for occasional happenings that anyone with eyes can see. Then there’s the speed-camera signs, but no speed cameras. Or, the classic “mobile speed camera” sign [3]. Fixed. In place. Forever. Or, the “New Road Layout” sign [4], where the layout will never grow old! Our street furniture has gone so extreme, there’s no way one could read all of it and concentrate properly on driving and the vast majority of it is utterly useless. /rant [1] https://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/04/64/50/4645087_4636b9c6.jpg https://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/04/64/50/4645087_4636b9... [2] https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/resources/images/19016634.jpg?type=og-image https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/resources/images/190... [3] https://s0.rbk.ru/v6_top_pics/media/img/9/55/754788605175559.jpeg https://s0.rbk.ru/v6_top_pics/media/img/9/55/754788605175559... [4] https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/New_Road_Layout_Ahead_Sign_-_Allendale_Road%2C_Loughborough.jpg?ssl=1 https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0...
- truculent 1y ago
  A favourite of mine is the London Underground having warnings about using the escalators, stating that last year there were 100 incidents from people not being sufficiently careful. Given the number of people using the service, this is incredibly small and I hardly think a sign is going to help the few people at risk!

Rodmine 1y ago

It's like your opinion, man. Aesthetic taste varies from culture-to-culture, even individual to individual. Sometimes, minimal and simple is beautiful. I really thought that the pictures you were posting later were examples of ugly design (when I was glossing over it) and I found out that you were saying that that one looks good to you. The one on top, the example of your ugly design, has natural beauty: a weathered concrete finish. I prefer that WAYYY more than any of the later examples.

croisillon 1y ago
the first one, the Mary McAleese bridge, is in the article as an example of a nice design
- hoseyor 1y ago
  I find that curious, because I would not even really call that a design. The distinguishing characteristics are more what it lacks than what it has. But for me it is in fact a symbolic character of the roughly 20th century that we still suffer from because it sucked all humanity and joy out of everything; including design, art, and beauty itself. That bridge represents the asphalt parking lot of bridges in my mind. Featureless, drab, barren, desolate, soulless, miserable, humanity crushing … the 20th century and its current ripple effects of shell shocked humans lacking any kind of identity, self-respect, or will for survival. It’s the “bare minimum nutrition to prevent by organs from failing” of bridges/design. At least do the equivalent of showing yourself and brushing your teeth by painting the bridge in some way so you are not constantly reminded that your culture, identity, and self-respect is dead and you have no will for survival.
  - airstrike 1y ago
    > I would not even really call that a design. The distinguishing characteristics are more what it lacks than what it has. “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” ― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
1y ago

troupo 1y ago

It's not just infrastructure. Most modern buildings are utilitarian and race-to-the-bottom cheap to a fault. And while a lot of this can be explained by the requirement to build a lot of things fast, and cheap, even one-off buildings that are supposed to be unique are... just slabs of concrete and/or glass. I think nowhere is it more evident than in Europe: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1912957880195575980 https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1912957880195575980

ozim 1y ago
Ugh let infrastructure be infrastructure inconspicuous. I don’t want to be attacked by flashy colored buildings all the time. Once in a while it is cool to have some art or colorful painting. I have my life to live, children, animals - I want to furnish my home to my taste. I don’t want to live in self proclaimed “taste critiques” environment. Every single of those posts “we live in boring landscape, cars are average and not standing out” - feels like those friends that come over for a party and want to show you all the funny YT videos they are amused by - I don’t care I have my own YT vids I am amused by and such people are just annoying not “cool”.
- troupo 1y ago
  > I don’t want to be attacked by flashy colored buildings all the time. There are other types of decorations than colors, and there are other colors than flashy. The very first example in the OG article isn't colorful, and is rather beautiful. The link to tweet shows a gray beautiful building. > I don’t want to live in self proclaimed “taste critiques” environment. If you are surrounded by ugly things, there's very little space where you can learn and develop taste. Already you can't imagine any other alternatives than "being surrounded by flashy colored buildings all the time" Edit: you are not alone. I've seen this "counterpoint" in quite a few conversations. Many people cannot imagine anything beyond "buildings in flashy colors" because that's usually the only alternative the modern world provides. Something like this: https://www.dreamstime.com/new-technologies-construction-multi-storey-buildings-modern-bright-colors-high-rise-russia-image232782910 https://www.dreamstime.com/new-technologies-construction-mul...
- lurking_swe 1y ago

hk1337 1y ago

I thought this was going to be software development focused, so I read it a bit from that perspective. > There are any number of ways to build an ugly bridge, but its builders were allowed to make it pretty, and they were right to do that. There's obviously extremes to this with developers being perfectionists holding up release (I could probably be on the poster for this) but the pendulum can swing the other way too. Sometimes not taking that extra hour or day to do something can cost you many hours and days later on in the future and to my point, sometimes taking that extra hour or day can save you hours or days in the future.

appleorchard46 1y ago

The more time goes on the more I appreciate Lady Bird Johnson's (first lady to Lyndon B Johnson) beautification of America project [0]. It's impressive how precise a response to modern urban hellscape woes it is: more greenery, native gardening, more pedestrian-friendly spaces, public transit, litter reduction, less billboards and advertising. The perspective that aesthetic beauty and things that just make a place nice to live tend to go hand-in-hand is an underrated one. > “Though the word beautification makes the concept sound merely cosmetic, it involves much more: clean water, clean air, clean roadsides, safe waste disposal and preservation of valued old landmarks as well as great parks and wilderness areas. To me…beautification means our total concern for the physical and human quality we pass on to our children and the future.” [0] https://www.nps.gov/articles/lady-bird-johnson-beautification-cultural-landscapes.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/lady-bird-johnson-beautificatio...

taeric 1y ago

Suspension bridges tend to be much prettier than other styles. I think this every time I get to cross the Tacoma Narrows. I'm assuming that is just a preference of mine based on how much rarer they are to see? Could be that they tend to be more expensive and have the maintenance baked into the costs? Good examples in the article of how to make others pretty. I'm assuming cost is almost always the limiting factor. Many "ugly" bridges have a hard time keeping up with required maintenance. Keeping any art clean and maintained is almost certainly not in the budget.

AlotOfReading 1y ago
Here's another hypothesis: making it look utilitarian is a way to preempt accusations of cost bloat. The first question anyone's going to ask about a nice looking design is "how much did we spend on that?". Ugly, utilitarian design says "I do exactly what you need and nothing else", which we interpret as cost efficient.
- taeric 1y ago
  Right, I think that plays into my assertion? Budgets are so tight that places tend to go out of their way not just to adhere to them, but to make sure it is clear that they are adhering.
- i80and 1y ago
  This is exactly it: I know people who, whenever they see something funded through taxes that is anything beyond the absolute bare minimum, start grousing about money regardless of any actual underlying costs. People wildly overestimate the costs of making things nice; penny-wise pound-foolish stuff.
- marcosdumay 1y ago
  In my experience, the number of people that will say "it was expensive, but it's really beautiful" on the reverse situation is overwhelmingly larger than the people that will say "how much did we spend on that?". In fact (and it annoys me to no end), people tend to think of expensive infrastructure as a positive trait, not a negative one.

notnmeyer 1y ago

surely this boils down to cost. if you prioritize low cost you will probably sacrifice aesthetics. maybe it doesn’t have to be that way, but it seems like it often is for better or worse. would i rather pay more in taxes for a nicer looking freeway or have it be utilitarian? ehhhhhhh, im unsure.

dsego 1y ago
Maybe, but also lack of taste. The classic comparison being PCs and Macs, most PC manufacturers lack taste to design beautiful machines, a lot of them gave up at this point and just copy whatever Apple is doing.

cadamsdotcom 1y ago

> We won't bean-count our way to a better future. I beg to differ. Cheaper stuff is accessible to more people. The problem is we haven’t figured out how to agree on how much ornamentation is the right amount.